Big Bird's Nest is well Feathered

[Pony Boy]

Originally Posted by DenverBrit

To be honest, I can't quantify how many, but Santorum does seem to represent many in the GOP when it comes to Governmental social interference. Something no true conservative would consider acceptable.

Lofgren does a nice job of time-lining the Fundamentalist shift, in agreement with Goldwater's comments.

I would agree with Santorum but add the importance of "States Right's" most conservatives I know want the Federal government off their backs and out of their daily lives. The states were united under one flag for protection and to provide a common currency for ease of interaction between them. This notion of a huge federal government heavy with programs, buyouts, bailouts, subsidies and entitlement programs was never the intention of the founding fathers.

[DenverBrit]

Originally Posted by Pony Boy

I would agree with Santorum but add the importance of "States Right's" most conservatives I know want the Federal government off their backs and out of their daily lives. The states were united under one flag for protection and to provide a common currency for ease of interaction between them. This notion of a huge federal government heavy with programs, buyouts, bailouts, subsidies and entitlement programs was never the intention of the founding fathers.

Likewise. Neither party fits that description right now.

The best we can hope for is bi partisan efforts after the election, but I fear it will be another 4 years of partisan squabbling; no matter who gets elected.

[Rohirrim]

The only way to fix that is get rid of special interests. Money isn't free speech. Corporations aren't people.

[DenverBrit]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

The only way to fix that is get rid of special interests. Money isn't free speech. Corporations aren't people.

Campaign finance reform would be top of my list, along with election reform.

Not sure how that will ever happen.

[Arkie]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Cut a third from the military budget, close foreign bases, end the debacle in Afghanistan now, restore the progressive tax system to it's pre-Reagan days, start a national, single-payer health care system, and we are back to surpluses in no time.

Surpluses are rare in the era of big government. The 81 year scorecard is

deficits: 69
surpluses: 12

and realistically, it's at least 80 to 12 with the projected future deficits.

[Jetmeck]

Originally Posted by Pony Boy

Sesame Workshop has a liquid cushion of over $130-million in cash and securities

I think your missing the point, I know it's about PBS and you know it's about PBS but Obama is the one claming that Big Bird will be an endangered species if Romney has his way.

He was missing the point, you have got to be kidding.

How stupid do you have to be post this dribble.

[spdirty]

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

^

We can always count on you to get things bass-ackwards.

Your candidate thinks he can balance the budget by cutting funding to a program that represents something like 0.01% of the budget.

[Arkie]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

^

We can always count on you to get things bass-ackwards.

Your candidate thinks he can balance the budget by cutting funding to a program that represents something like 0.01% of the budget.

His actual quote was

First of all, I will eliminate all programs based on this test, if they don’t pass it – Is the program so critical it’s worth borrowing money from China to pay for it. And if not, I’ll get rid of it. I’m sorry Jim, I’m going to stop the subsidy to PBS. I’m going to stop other things. I like PBS. I love Big Bird. I actually like you, too. But I’m not going to—I’m not going to keep on spending money on things to borrow money from China to pay for it. That’s No. 1.

Is this the quote that misled you, or are you just trying to mislead others?

[BroncoInferno]

Originally Posted by Arkie

His actual quote was

Is this the quote that misled you, or are you just trying to mislead others?

Um, not sure why you think posting that quote helps? Romney talks a big game about how it's a moral imperative to not spend more than we take in, but when asked for specifics the best he can come up with is PBS, which is chickenfeed relative to the budget.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Arkie

His actual quote was

Is this the quote that misled you, or are you just trying to mislead others?

I'm sure he'll find lots of rightie pals on Capitol Hill to help him defund PBS, and the arts, and health, and the safety net, and education, and every other "people" program that they despise. When he tries to apply that same criteria to the bloated defense budget or corporate welfare, they'll laugh him right out of their offices.

[Pony Boy]

Originally Posted by BroncoInferno

Um, not sure why you think posting that quote helps? Romney talks a big game about how it's a moral imperative to not spend more than we take in, but when asked for specifics the best he can come up with is PBS, which is chickenfeed relative to the budget.

Because LABF's quote stated Romney said he could balance the budget by cutting only one program ....... so it was Arkie’s intention to post the entire quote to make it clear to buffoons like LABF.

Obviously Arkie doesn’t know LABF only speaks in cartoons ……

[BroncoInferno]

Originally Posted by Pony Boy

Because LABF's quote stated Romney said he could balance the budget by cutting only one program…

Well, since PBS is the only program Romney will specifically name, it's easy to draw that conclusion.

[Pony Boy]

Originally Posted by BroncoInferno

Well, since PBS is the only program Romney will specifically name, it's easy to draw that conclusion.

Romney Quote:

"I will eliminate all programs based on this test, if they don’t pass it – Is the program so critical it’s worth borrowing money from China to pay for it. And if not, I’ll get rid of it".

[BroncoInferno]

Originally Posted by Pony Boy

Romney Quote:

"I will eliminate all programs based on this test, if they don’t pass it – Is the program so critical it’s worth borrowing money from China to pay for it. And if not, I’ll get rid of it".

Do you know what the word "specific" means? That's quite a vague declaration, because we don't know what Romney's definition is of a "critical" program. It would help if he would name more than one piddling agency (PBS represents a whopping ~ 0.1% of the budget).

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Pony Boy

Because LABF's quote stated Romney said he could balance the budget by cutting only one program ....... so it was Arkie’s intention to post the entire quote to make it clear to buffoons like LABF.

Obviously Arkie doesn’t know LABF only speaks in cartoons ……

What happens when right-wing idiots like Pony Boy have their way...

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Pony Boy

Because LABF's quote stated Romney said he could balance the budget by cutting only one program ....... so it was Arkie’s intention to post the entire quote to make it clear to buffoons like LABF.

Obviously Arkie doesn’t know LABF only speaks in cartoons ……

Cartoons are about all your diminutive brain can process.

You should be thanking me for trying to include you in the conversation.

[Fedaykin]

Originally Posted by BroncoInferno

Um, not sure why you think posting that quote helps? Romney talks a big game about how it's a moral imperative to not spend more than we take in, but when asked for specifics the best he can come up with is PBS, which is chickenfeed relative to the budget.

This say sit all about the complete lack of a real functioning plan Romney has. In a national debate, perhaps the most important stage of all the presidential campaign events, and the best plan Romney can articulate in detail is to kill PBS.

Doesn't matter one damn bit that he's talks in vague terms about "cutting spending". If he can't, on that stage, talk about even *one* significant change he'd make, he either a.) has no plan or b.) knows his real plan will not get him elected.